reply to this for a discussion This is a really interesting topic to think about, and honestly, I'm still not completely set on one side or the other. But for the sake of this discussion, I would lead toward saying that college athletes should not be classified as employees right now, even though NIL has definitely pushed things closer in that direction. After going through the readings and cases, the biggest concern for me is how differently this could unfold at private versus public universities. The NLRB only has authority over private schools, like we saw in the Dartmouth case, which means those athletes could be ruled employees while public universities still follow their own state laws. That could create two completely different systems, so making all athletes employees just doesn't seem too realistic at this point. A better approach might be waiting for a federal law or updated NCAA rules that apply evenly. One major issue Darren Heitner emphasized is that many athletes don't fully understand the legal risks involved in their NIL deals, especially when it comes to inducement and contract terms. To address this, athletic departments should provide mandatory NIL education sessions each semester, led by sports lawyers or compliance staff who can break down real examples and explain what athletes should be cautious of. This issue also reinforces how important proper athlete representation is. A knowledgeable, trustworthy, and credible sports agent can help athletes navigat